Agreed that culling renaming is needed; but also adding (since we have some
modules like "process" and "wps" that are not represented.
It is easier for us to track bugs according to what module they are in -
however that is harder for users to report against. Hopefully they can report
against w
Hi Jody,
> - issues that are not assigned to any component
>
> The last one is interesting and my focus for the day - these are the issues
> that are not
> likely to be noticed by a module maintainer (or anyone!). I wish we could
> mark this field
> as mandatory...
I think a culling / renaming
Took a small run at this yesterday (Andrea and Michael stopped by for a bit).
And you can start to see a spike here:
- http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/GEOT
There are a couple of things that stopped or slowed me down:
- Many admin issues associated with osgeo graduation have not been addressed
(
Wow that is a lot of work. So you are needing to set the hint on a feature by
feature basis - suspect we have completely given up on Transaction for hint
purposes? You have not made an api change so committing to 2.6.x seems
reasonable. Proposals work best when you don't have an implementation r
Hi,
some time ago we started a discussion on how to support
the ability to insert a feature with FeatureStore.addFeatures
so that the feature id is used as is in the underlying
storage instead of being generated.
Today I cooked a little patch that enables the above
in all JDBC data stores and in
[
http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/GEOT-1439?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Jody Garnett reopened GEOT-1439:
Was unable to accept the fix; resulted in test failures.
> Bad parsing of GetFeature request
> --
